Mitch McConnell

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 711.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, on Monday, Senate Republicans released a starting proposal for another major pandemic rescue package. This is what we want to do: Continue a Federal supplement to unemployment benefits that is otherwise about to expire; send thousands of dollars more in cash to American families; keep funding the Payroll Protection Program to prevent more layoffs; subsidize rehiring to get laid-off workers their jobs back and create new incentives for workplace safety; give K-12 schools, colleges, and universities funding to reopen safely--more money than the House Democrats have proposed; support healthcare providers in the latest hotspots and keep supporting the race for vaccines; provide commonsense legal protection so that schools, hospitals, and other employers can reopen without being buried in lawsuits. That is what we put forward--a trillion dollars for kids, jobs, and healthcare. It is a framework that is more generous in key areas than House Democrats' totally unserious proposal--a framework that could have kept the additional Federal payments to unemployed workers flowing instead of expiring this week. There is a fact of life here in the Senate. It takes 60 votes to legislate, so the American people cannot get any of the additional relief that Republicans want to give them unless Democrats at least come to the table. Either our Democratic colleagues come to the table or the American people will not get the help they need. That is why I said this week we have come down to one key question: Will the country get the Democrats who showed up back in March to pass the bipartisan CARES Act or will the country get the Democrats who showed up in June to block police reform and keep that issue alive through November? Unfortunately, 3 days in, it hasn't been a close call. The Speaker of the House and the Democratic leader refuse to let anyone else speak on their side. I understand the Democratic leader has actually forbidden-- forbidden his own Democratic ranking members from talking and negotiating with their Republican counterparts who are spearheading the different components. You see, bipartisan, Member-level discussions might actually generate some progress, and progress does not appear to be something the leaders on the other side want. On Monday, the Speaker of the House claimed she could not wait to start negotiations, but then on Tuesday, she said her discussion with the administration ``isn't a negotiation.'' And then the Speaker said: ``The appropriate thing for the Senate to do is pass a bill and then we can negotiate with them.'' Meanwhile, the Democratic leader is over here making sure that cannot happen. This is quite the partnership: the House Speaker moves the goalposts while the Democratic leader hides the football. They will not engage when the Trump administration tries to discuss our comprehensive plan. They will not engage when the Administration floats a narrower proposal. They, basically, will not engage, period. The Speaker and the Democratic leader are playing rope-a-dope with the health, welfare, and livelihoods of American families. With benefits expiring, with the Paycheck Protection Program winding down, and millions unemployed, the Democrats are saying ``my way or the highway'' with a Socialist wish list that was laughed off by everyone from journalists to economists the instant they introduced it. This is what reporters had to say about Speaker Pelosi's proposal in May: ``The more than 1,800-page bill makes a long wish list for Democrats.'' ``Neither this bill nor anything reassembling it will ever become law.'' Even the Speaker's own Democratic Members knew it was a joke. ``Privately, several House Democrats concede the bill feels more like an effort to appease the most liberal members of the caucus.'' Yet this is what they are holding out for. Let's recall some of the specific items. These are the things over which Democrats are blowing up negotiations and forcing a lapse in extra unemployment benefits: tax increase on small businesses; taxpayer-funded checks for illegal immigrants; taxpayer-funded diversity studies of the legal pot industry; and their ongoing obsession with something called the State and local tax, or SALT, which would be a massive giveaway for high earners in blue States. In other words, a tax cut for high earners in blue States. Let me say that again. Democrats are holding up help for struggling people over special tax breaks for rich people in blue States, an idea that has been criticized by economists from all sides. Republicans want to get more help to families right now, but Speaker Pelosi says: Let them eat SALT. They also want to spend another trillion dollars bailing out State and local governments that only spent--listen to this--25 percent of the money we sent them back in March. Some State and local governments have only spent 25 percent of the money we sent them back in March, and the Speaker and Democratic leader want to send them another trillion dollars. This is silly stuff. None of it should be stopping negotiations and none of it would be if our Democratic colleagues actually wanted to get an outcome. Let's talk about unemployment insurance. Both Republicans and Democrats agree in these extraordinary times it makes sense for the Federal Government to provide the stark additional help on top of normal unemployment. Republicans don't want this aid to expire. Our plan continues it, but the Speaker and the Democratic leader say they will not agree to anything unless the program pays people more to stay home than to work. Prominent Democrats have publicly said they agree with our position. The Democratic Governor of Connecticut says he wants to continue the benefit at a more targeted level. Multiple Members of the Senate and Speaker Pelosi's own House Democratic Majority Leader have all said in the last few days that they are open to negotiating this, but the Speaker and the Democratic leader have cut all their colleagues out. They are standing alone, saying: ``Our way or the highway.'' And so people are going to suffer. I understand the Democratic leader said he felt offended when I noted that some people are suggesting the Democrats' strange behavior is explained by politics; that some people think Democrats are behaving like national suffering would only hurt President Trump. Now, the Democratic leader, himself, pointed that exact accusation at various Republicans during the Obama Presidency on multiple occasions. I know memories can be short around here when it is convenient. More broadly, actions speak louder than words. Democrats spent weeks shouting that the Senate should act on police reform, but when Senator Tim Scott gave them the chance, they blocked action. They blocked the Senate from even taking up the subject. And now, so far, this is the sequel. Democrats talked a big game about wanting to provide more assistance, but now that it is ``go time,'' they show zero appetite for any bipartisan outcome at all. This is personal for me. Kentucky has not finished fighting with the coronavirus, and the Federal Government must not be finished helping Kentucky. Laid-off Kentuckians need more help. Kentucky schools need more help. Under our proposal, Kentucky alone would receive $193 million for testing and contact tracing to fight the spread of the disease. This should be just as personal for every single Senator. None of our States deserve the Democrats' rope-a-dope. No American family deserves it. Don't my distinguished ranking member colleagues wish they could be involved in robust bipartisan discussions with our chairman, like back in March, and not watching from the sidelines as their leader shuts down talks on TV? Do they really think the Democratic leader's tactics are serving the common good of their States? Republicans have put forward a framework that would do huge amounts of good for huge numbers of American families. If Democrats ever come to the table, we will be able to bridge our differences and make a law.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, when the Senate passed the CARES Act back in March, we were trying to prepare the Nation for economic paralysis and the medical battle of the century at the very same time. Hospitals, healthcare providers, small businesses, and working families needed help fast, and the Senate stepped up in historic fashion. For months, our legislation has helped cushion the pain of this crisis from coast to coast, but our Nation is not finished with this fight. More Americans are dying every day. Millions and millions are unemployed. And the institutions of American life cannot stay totally shut down until our race for a vaccine hits the finish line. Our Nation needs to smartly and safely reopen while keeping up the medical battle. We need to get kids safely back to school and adults safely back to work without losing ground in the healthcare fight. The coronavirus does not care that we are divided. The coronavirus will not care if Washington Democrats decide it suits their partisan goals to let relief run dry. The American people are hurting, and Congress should have their backs. On Monday, I laid down a marker to shape the bipartisan conversations that need to happen now--not a loony, ideological fantasy like the House Democrats bill from a few months ago, which would have cut taxes for rich people, raised taxes on small business, and provided no additional round for the Paycheck Protection Program. No, serious talks actually require a serious starting point. That is why we wrote a serious bill containing largely bipartisan policies. It has another round of cash for households--more than $3,000 for an eligible family of four, with even more support for adult dependents; another round of additional Federal unemployment benefits assistance, which would otherwise simply expire; and another targeted round of the Paycheck Protection Program to prevent even more layoffs and keep paychecks coming to American workers. It has powerful new incentives to jump-start rehiring, bring down unemployment, and create safe workplaces for workers and customers. It has more support for hospitals and health providers; more support for testing, PPE, and diagnostics; and more resources for the sprint toward a vaccine. It has historic support for schools to reopen--a higher dollar amount than House Democrats managed to propose in their bill, which costs three times as much as ours. And--uniting all three pillars of kids, jobs, and healthcare--we have legal protection for medical workers, schools, nonprofits, and businesses so that well-connected trial lawyers can't get even richer off of stopping the recovery in its tracks. This is a more-than-fair, more-than-bipartisan framework for Democrats to engage with. The only reason I can see that Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic leader would sabotage negotiations is if, as some concluded when they killed police reform in June, they actually think bipartisan progress for the country would hurt their own political chances. That is why I said a few days ago that we would quickly learn whether the American people would be getting the responsible Democratic Party from March or the cynical, obstructionist Democratic Party from June that blocked police reform. So let's review the early going. Almost the instant we put out this proposal--which would send thousands of dollars in cash to families and even more cash to unemployed people--the Democratic leader proclaimed that ``those Republican, hard-right money people . . . don't want the Federal Government to help anybody.'' A trillion dollar proposal for kids, jobs, and healthcare just proves Republicans don't want to help anyone. Yesterday, after meeting with the administration, the Speaker of the House said this ``isn't a negotiation.' So here we go again. It is the script from police reform all over again. We have had weeks of talk from Democrats about the urgency of the issue, weeks of Democrats thundering that people will be hurt if we don't act. But then, when it is time to actually make a law, Democrats would rather keep political issues alive than find a bipartisan way to resolve them. Take the issue of additional Federal unemployment insurance. For weeks now, it has been clear to a majority of Americans that we should not pay people more to stay home than we pay people who continue working. Should we have generous unemployment insurance in this crisis? Of course. Republicans want to continue the Federal supplement at eight times the level that Democrats themselves put in place during the last recession. But, obviously, we should not be taxing the essential workers who have kept working so the government can pay their neighbors a higher salary to stay home. Let me say that again. We should not be taxing the essential workers who have kept working so the government can pay their neighbors a higher salary to stay home. Until about 5 minutes ago, this was not a controversial opinion. Democrats shared it with us. The House Democrat majority leader said yesterday: ``That's an argument that . . . has some validity to it. . . . It's not $600 or bust.'' A few days earlier, our Democratic colleague Senator Coons said he thought we would be ``finding some path forward'' with a different dollar figure. The day before yesterday, our colleague Senator Cardin said: ``What is the right number? Well, we certainly understand we don't want someone to have higher benefits than what someone can make working.'' At the State level, the Democratic Governor of Connecticut agrees. This is what he said: ``I think sometimes it discourages work. . . . I would put off this extra $600 true-up they're talking about. . . . I don't think we need that.'' That is the Democratic Governor of Connecticut. Like I said, it is not controversial. The Congressional Budget Office says that five out of six recipients of this aid--83 percent--receive more to stay home than they made on the job. Let me say that one more time. The Congressional Budget Office says that five out of six recipients of this aid--83 percent--receive more to stay home than they made on the job. We all know that is not fair, and it is not workable in a reopening job market. We have already heard from small business owners who had trouble reopening because it would be financially irrational for their employees to come back. This is why Republicans propose to continue providing Federal aid-- continue providing hundreds of dollars per week--but do it in a more targeted way while providing even more incentives for rehiring. But now the Speaker of the House apparently signals she rejects this bipartisan consensus and will not let a package go forward unless we continue paying people more not to work. That is apparently the Speaker's position--that she will not let a package go forward unless we continue paying people more not to work. That is what Speaker Pelosi apparently signaled yesterday: No money for schools, no money for households, no second round of the PPP, no more money for hospitals or testing, nothing at all unless we continue to pay people more not to work. If the Democrats don't get to continue taxing essential workers to pay other people more to stay home, then nobody gets a dime. To put it gently, that is a completely unhinged position. Sixty-two percent of Americans say that paying people extra to remain unemployed creates the wrong incentive. A Democratic Governor says he doesn't want that continuing. Her own deputy, the House Democratic majority leader, said yesterday that there should be room to negotiate. But Speaker Pelosi is literally moving the goalposts so fast that even Democrats can't keep up, and now she apparently feels that any rescue package will have to be to the political left of her own Democratic majority leader, to the political left of the Democratic Governor of Connecticut or she will not even consider it. She will just refuse to legislate until the election and wish the American families good luck in dealing with the pandemic. These are not the positions of people who are putting the common good above politics. These are not the positions of people who actually want to reach an agreement to save Federal unemployment insurance from completely expiring. The American people deserve better than this. The American people cannot afford for Democrats in Congress to have decided in June that they are finished legislating until November--not during a crisis like this. The country needs help. The country needs action. If Democratic leaders decide they will not negotiate, they will answer to the American people.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, this summer, it was my privilege to select several talented young Kentuckians for an internship in my Washington Senate office. As a former Senate intern myself, I am proud of the individuals who are eager to apply themselves to public service. I would like to take a moment to commend James Adams of Jefferson County, William Cohen of Jefferson County, Julian Colvin of Jefferson County, Garland Ellis of Bell County, Mary Grace Furnish of Harrison County, William Miller of Taylor County, Lauren Reuss of Spencer County, Samuel Rickert of Oldham County, Elizabeth Rupp of Fayette County, Madelin Shelton of Owen County, Victoria Sisk of Christian County, Jordan White of Campbell County, and Erdin Zukic of Warren County for their interest in serving the Commonwealth of Kentucky and our great Nation. Each of these young people has developed an impressive list of leadership experiences and extracurricular activities. Their applications stood out, and I was proud to offer them an internship. Unfortunately, the coronavirus crisis forced the cancelation of this summer's internship program. The virus may have taken away this opportunity, but it can never change the great potential these Kentuckians have in store. I would like to thank each of them for pursuing public service and to extend my best wishes for a bright future.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, it was my privilege to select three outstanding high school students from Kentucky for this summer's U.S. Senate Page Program. These talented young people completed a highly competitive application process, and they represent the next generation of Kentucky's leaders. I would like to take a moment to commend Jackson Hester, Charlotte McCarthy, and Thomas Schrepferman for their interest in serving the Commonwealth of Kentucky and our great Nation. Their applications showed a broad range of leadership experiences and extracurricular activities. These Kentuckians and their families should be proud of all they've accomplished at this young age. Unfortunately, the coronavirus crisis made it impossible for the Senate Page Program to bring these students to Washington this summer. The virus may have canceled this opportunity, but it can never change the great potential these young people have in store. I would like to thank Jackson, Charlotte, and Thomas for their commitment to public service and extend my best wishes for a bright future.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Yesterday, Senate Republicans put forward the HEALS Act, our framework for another round of historic relief for American workers and families. Our Nation stands at a challenging crossroads. We have one foot in this pandemic and one foot in the recovery. We can't go back to April, and until we have a vaccine, we can't go back to normal either. What the American people need is smart, safe, and sustainable middle ground, and they need Congress's help to construct it. That is exactly what our major proposal would do. Everyone knows that another rescue package will need to be bipartisan to pass the Senate. So the question before the country is now really quite simple: Are we going to see the versions of House and Senate Democrats that helped us unanimously pass the CARES Act back in March, or are we, instead, going to see the same Democrats who decided to block police reform in June and lash out at Senator Tim Scott's proposal instead of working with him to make law? In other words, do the Speaker of the House and the Democratic leader believe that struggling Americans deserve an outcome, or do they want to stay on the sidelines and recite talking points? Well, yesterday, even before the Democrats had seen our legislation, they began attacking it. All the tired, old partisan tropes were trotted out. Before releasing a proposal that wants to give schools even more reopening money than the House Democrats' bill and which would continue additional unemployment benefits at eight times the dollar amount Democrats established during the last crisis, we were informed here on the floor that ``those Republican hard-right money people . . . don't want the Federal Government to help anybody.'' This is beyond parody. Republicans put forward a trillion-dollar proposal for kids, jobs, and healthcare, including direct cash to households, and even more cash to unemployed people. And the Democrats say it proves we don't want to help people. They say it proves we don't want to help people. These are not serious statements. It is politics as usual, with talking points that went stale 20 years ago. But the week is young and the HEALS Act is full of provisions I would, frankly, dare my Democratic colleagues to actually say they oppose. Republicans want to extend supplemental unemployment insurance at hundreds of dollars per week. If Democrats block legislation, it will stop all together. Republicans want to send thousands of dollars more to American families through direct payments. If Democrats will not come to the table, they will get nothing. Republicans want to use tax incentives to encourage the rehiring of laid-off workers and the creation of safer workplaces through things like testing, remodeling, and PPE. If Democrats block action, workers will be on their own. Republicans want to specifically protect Medicare seniors from a spike in premiums because of COVID. If Democrats treat the HEALS Act the way they treated police reform, seniors will be on their own as well. Republicans want to pour money into K-12 schools and give greater flexibility to childcare providers so America's kids can have a safe but more normal school year. If Democrats block action, school districts will get none of us. Republicans want to create a second targeted round of PPE to keep small businesses above water. If Democrats will not negotiate, the ``now open'' signs will come down and the ``going out of business'' signs will replace them. Republicans want to proactively expand our domestic manufacturing capability for masks and PPE and medical countermeasures. If Democrats refuse to negotiate, we will be just as dependent on adversaries as competitors in the next crisis. Republicans want to protect doctors, nurses, school districts, and universities from a second epidemic of frivolous lawsuits. If Democrats don't come to the table, our Nation's reopening will be at the mercy of trial lawyers. Republicans want to go even further to backstop hospitals and healthcare providers and fuel the sprint for vaccines. If Democrats will not let us, Americans will just have to cross our fingers and hope the medical system remains stable. To be clear, Republicans are not proposing to ``cut'' any relief. Under current law, expanded UI expires and is replaced with nothing. Under current law, there are no more direct payments and no second PPP. Every single thing we put forward is a way to get more relief into people's hands. Our Democratic colleagues want to pretend it is controversial, somehow, that taxpayers should not pay people more not to work than people who do go back to work. They want to pretend it is controversial that taxpayers should not pay people more not to work than people who do go back to work? The American people don't call it a controversy. They call it common sense. They call it basic fairness. This is absolutely a time to be generous and provide additional Federal relief to people who have been laid off, but we should not be redistributing money away from the essential workers who have remained at their posts. We should not be taxing somebody who has been stocking shelves for months so the government can pay their neighbor more than she makes to sit at home. That is what we are talking about--taxing essential workers to pay their neighbors a bonus to stay home. One study by university economists just found these benefits can exceed people's previous incomes two-thirds of the time. They found a medium recipient earns 134 percent of their prior salary. That means half are making even more than that. That is just not fair. It is not compatible with a reopening economy and more than 6 in 10 Americans feel this creates a disincentive to work. Even the Democratic House majority leader said just this morning that our perspective ``has some validity to it and we have to deal with that . . . it's not $600 or bust.'' That was the majority leader in the House. The Democratic majority leader in the House said: ``It's not $600 or bust.'' So let's get past these partisan cheap shots and have an adult conversation. Look at it this way. Think about one street, one block in one neighborhood, anywhere in America. Think how they would benefit if this bill were signed into law. Right now, several families on that block probably have no idea whether their kids will be heading back to school in a few weeks. Our bill would provide the money and legal certainty for school districts to reopen safely. Let's talk about the families' pocketbooks. Likely, every mailbox on that street or each checking account would get another $1,200 per adult and $500 per dependent. For a family of four, we are talking about $3,400 in cash. Maybe some of these homeowners are among the millions of Americans who have been thrown into joblessness. As we discussed, they would get hundreds of dollars more every week in added unemployment. But because we are doing it smarter, if anyone on the street owns a coffee shop or a contracting business, they will not hear from workers that they are earning more by staying at home. Those unemployed workers will get back on the job faster when our bill supercharges incentives for rehiring and helps pay for health and safety in the workplace. Maybe some other people on the street have held onto their jobs because of the historic Paycheck Protection Program. Their employer is considering closing down with that relief nearly exhausted. Our targeted second round of PPP could keep their paycheck coming instead of a pink slip. Maybe a retired couple lives on this block. If our proposal for Medicare Part B premiums becomes law, this couple will be protected from a spike in costs due to this pandemic, and needless to say, every single person on that street would benefit from even stronger Federal investments in the diagnostics, treatments, and vaccines that will ultimately win this healthcare battle for all of us. So, look, it is very simple. Partisan histrionics will not get any American family any of the relief I just described. Calling names will not get school districts one dime. Washington finger-pointing will not add 1 cent to anyone's unemployment check. The Democrats face a simple choice. They can come to the table, work with the Republicans, and engage seriously to make law for the American people or they can stay on the sidelines, point fingers, and let another rescue package go the same way as the police reform bill they killed back in June. The Republicans are ready to govern. We just need the Democrats to decide whether they are serious about actually making law.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call be waived.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session for a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the provisions of rule XXII, the Senate vote on the motions to invoke cloture on the Joseph and Wade nominations at 11:30 a.m. tomorrow in the order listed; further, that if cloture is invoked on the nominations, the postcloture time expire at 2:30 p.m. tomorrow and the Senate vote on confirmation of the nominations in that order. I further ask unanimous consent that, if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; and finally, that the cloture motions with respect to the Kaplan and McFerran nominations ripen following the disposition of the Wade nomination.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 322, S. 881.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Peters substitute amendment at the desk be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that S. 4187 be discharged from the Committee on Environment and Public Works and be referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res. 106, which was received from the House.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m., Tuesday, July 28; further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; further, that following leader remarks, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Joseph nomination, under the previous order; finally, that following the cloture vote on the Wade nomination, the Senate recess until 2:15 to allow for the weekly conference meetings.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent it stand adjourned under the previous order following the remarks of Senators Coons and Whitehouse.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res. 105, which was received from the House.

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Today, as we speak, the U.S. Congress confers a rare and high honor on a national hero who richly deserves it. Our distinguished late colleague, Congressman John Lewis, is lying in state in the Rotunda. I had the honor to speak at this afternoon's ceremony--how amazing to reflect on John's incredible American life. It began deep in the segregated South, ran through lunch counters in Nashville, jail cells in Mississippi, across the Edmund Pettus Bridge, up the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, and brought him to the halls of Congress. He made heroic contributions to our Nation's march toward racial justice. He also brought an unforgettable example of moral urgency, respect, and love to Washington that left an impact on everyone he met. His example will be missed here in the Capitol. He will be remembered forever by a grateful Nation because, as far as I am concerned, it is not really the rest of us in Congress who are conveying an honor upon John Lewis today, not this time. Rather, it is John who is bringing greater honor to us, to this Capitol, with his presence, one final time.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, COVID-19 has killed nearly 150,000 Americans. It has caused massive layoffs on a historic scale and left 17 million people out of work. It has thrown the lives and the trajectories of our Nation's children and young adults into uncertainty. Our Nation stands now at an important crossroads in this battle. American families' historic sacrifices brought our medical system through the springtime intact. The very early stages of our economic recovery have been promising and our Nation needs to continue to proceed with a smart and safe reopening. At the same time, the virus is still with us. It is still spreading, and it does not care about our fragile economic progress or our frustration with restrictions, or anything else, besides infecting as many people as possible. So we have one foot in the pandemic and one foot in the recovery. The American people need more help. They need it to be comprehensive, and they need it to be carefully tailored to these crossroads. That is what this Senate majority has assembled, and that is what Chairmen Alexander, Blunt, Collins, Graham, Grassley, Rubio, and Shelby, and Senators Cornyn and Romney are introducing today. They will be coming to the floor shortly to introduce their components. Together, their bills make up the HEALS Act--health, economic assistance, liability protection, and schools--health, economic assistance, liability protection, and schools. Just like in March, with the CARES Act, Senate Republicans have authored another bold framework to help our Nation. Now we need our Democratic colleagues to reprise their part as well. They need to put aside the partisan stonewalling we saw on police reform and rediscover the spirit of urgency that got the CARES Act across the finish line, and quickly join us around the negotiating table. It will take bipartisan cooperation to make the HEALS Act into law for the American people. The Senate will not waste time with pointless partisanship. There is a reason why even Speaker Pelosi and Leader Schumer themselves have publicly downplayed the multitrillion-dollar socialist manifesto they published a few weeks back and have suggested the real, serious discussion would begin when Republicans released our outline. We have produced a tailored and targeted draft that will cut right to the heart of three distinct crises facing our country--getting kids back in school, getting workers back to work, and winning the healthcare fight against the virus--kids, jobs, and healthcare. First, our Nation's kids. Chairmen Alexander, Blunt, and Shelby will be introducing a sweeping package to help schools and universities reopen safely. We are talking about more than $100 billion--more for an education fund than House Democrats put aside in a bill that spent multiple trillions. There are policies to help childcare providers and schools have the flexibility they need to function. Second, jobs. Since our Nation has one foot in the pandemic and one foot in the recovery, our economic policies have to acknowledge both sides of that coin. Chairman Grassley will introduce another round of direct checks for households at the same amount as before, with even more support for families who care for vulnerable adult dependents. Chairmen Collins and Rubio have designed a sequel to their historic PPP to help prevent more layoffs of American workers. Republicans want to continue a Federal supplement to State unemployment insurance. In fact, we will propose a weekly dollar amount that is eight times what Democrats put in place when they controlled the White House and Congress during the great recession. But we have to do it in a way that does not slow down reopening. We are also going to help this country pivot into recovery. The American people don't just want relief; they want opportunity so long as the reopenings can be safe. So Chairman Grassley will walk through strong economic incentives to boost worker retention, get Americans rehired, and help small businesses buy the PPE, testing, and supplies that will protect employees and customers alike. Senator Romney has legislation to help a future Congress ensure our critical national trust funds remain strong. In looking to our long-term jobs future, there is no question this pandemic has America and our allies reexamining our degree of dependence on China. Chairman Graham is introducing a package of legislation that will incentivize PPE manufacturing right here at home. It will ensure that our efforts to rebuild our national stockpile of protective gear actually benefit American workers instead of just stimulating China, and it will bring a heightened focus to other key concerns, such as high-tech semiconductor manufacturing, critical minerals, and intellectual property theft so that the lessons of this pandemic do not go unlearned. Finally, healthcare. Chairmen Alexander, Grassley, and others I have already named have legislation to keep America on offense against this virus for diagnostics, treatments, vaccines, hospitals and healthcare workers, and protecting seniors who rely on Medicare from premium spikes. Our legislation supports all of it at continued historic levels. In tying kids, jobs, and healthcare all together, Senator Cornyn has authored strong legal liability protections so that nurses, doctors, charities, school districts, colleges, and employers can spend their next months actually reopening rather than fighting for their lives against frivolous lawsuits. We will preserve accountability in the event of gross negligence or intentional misconduct, but we are not going to let trial lawyers throw a party on the backs of the frontline workers and institutions that have fought this new enemy on the frontlines. Health, economic assistance, liability, and schools--another historic package for the next phase of this historic national fight. To make a law, bipartisan talks need to come next. So there is one big question facing the country right now: Which version of our distinguished Democratic colleagues are the American people about to get? Are we going to get the Democratic Party we got in March, when our colleagues met us in good-faith negotiations and worked with us to turn our framework into a bipartisan product--the Democrats who helped us pass the largest rescue package in American history without one dissenting vote--or will the country get the Democratic Party we saw in June, when our colleagues refused to suggest amendments or improvements to Senator Tim Scott's police reform bill and chose to block the issue altogether? Their actions last month left some observers wondering whether the Democrats had made this cynical choice to give up on bipartisan legislation altogether right through November, whether the Democrats had determined that strengthening our Nation with bipartisan action might hurt their political odds and, therefore, it might suit their fortunes better if pain and chaos simply continued. I hope that is completely off base. I know our Democratic colleagues know this crisis is still urgent. I know they know American families need more help. I hope this strong proposal will occasion a real response, not partisan cheap shots, not the predictable, tired, old rhetoric as though these were ordinary times and the Nation could afford ordinary politics. We cannot have a Senate minority decide in June it is done legislating until November. The pandemic is not finished. The economic pain is not finished, so Congress cannot be finished either.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.